• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sex Strike! Abstinence trends on Twitter in wake of Roe v. Wade ruling


Abstinence was trending on Twitter on Saturday in the wake the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

A number of pro-choice Americans on social media were also pushing for a nationwide sex strike after the high court struck down the landmark abortion ruling.

“Women of America: Take the pledge. Because SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade, we cannot take the risk of an unintended pregnancy, therefore, we will not have sex with any man — including our husbands — unless we are trying to become pregnant,” one Twitter user wrote.
=============================================================
From the sound of this the hubbys are the ones left in the lurch. Ladies: there are a number of ways to sexually satisfy your partner without risking pregnancy. You might have to catch some porn to gather some pointers. Hubby will thank you for doing your homework.
So they are going to do what many pro-lifers suggested.
 
Let's get the Bible laws into the books. Onan "spilled his seed on the ground" The Bible says that Onan did evil and that God slew him.
Amazing how many non-chrisitans and non-jews get that wrong. It has nothing to do with masturbation. It has to do with the fact Onan was supposed impregnate the wife of his deceased brother due to some tribal custom that says if a husband died before fathering a child then the husband's oldest single surviving brother of legal age(sexual maturity is probably a better word) is supposed father a child in his place. He wasn't killed for beating off, heck wasn't even beating off. He was pulling it out before he busted a nut into his sister in-law so that way she couldn't get pregnant.

Genesis 38:8-10, the sin of Onan:

8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Sleep with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to raise up offspring for your brother.” 9 But Onan knew that the child would not be his; so whenever he slept with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from providing offspring for his brother. 10 What he did was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death also.
 
Last edited:
Remove pro-lifers from the gene pool.
Not really much of a threat when abortionists will just abort babies regardless of what the father believes anyways.
 
Not really much of a threat when abortionists will just abort babies regardless of what the father believes anyways.
If you had a real argument you would not need to use the emotional tactic of claiming that people who are pro-choice and believe that it is the mothers decision and only her to decide if she want to terminate a fetus into claiming that they are pro-abortion and would make that choice easily or even to force others to abort a wanted pregnancy, which has never been the case.
 
o·nan·ism
/ˈōnəˌnizəm/

noun
FORMAL

  1. 1.
    masturbation.

  2. 2.
    coitus interruptus.
 
That will go a long way to solving a good portion of the problem. Of course most of the leftists threatening a sex strike are people no man would want to **** in the first place...so its not much of a threat.
 
If you had a real argument you would not need to use the emotional tactic of claiming that people who are pro-choice and believe that it is the mothers decision and only her to decide if she want to terminate a fetus into claiming that they are pro-abortion and would make that choice easily or even to force others to abort a wanted pregnancy, which has never been the case.
People who favor abortion being legalized are pro-abortion.Nothing emotional about it.


: favoring the legalization of abortion
 
So, while the pro choice women plan on withholding sex, the pro life women will intentionally breed just to balance things out…
 
People who favor abortion being legalized are pro-abortion.Nothing emotional about it.


: favoring the legalization of abortion
People who favor abortion being legal are pro-choice. This decision is better then women and her Ob-Gyn and often in time of medical cries or the result of a crime. The decision to terminate a pregnant is not for your religion or pandering republican politicians or hypocritical judges to make. This is medical decision and it is at the core of personal autonomy.

The idea that the separation of church and state as well as the free exercise clause were also trampled because there is no idea that is not anti-choice that is not based on a religious belief. There are many women who are adamantly pro-choice but would never have an abortion themselves because of their own ethics.

Stop being so binary and think though the multiple levels of this issue.
 
If you had a real argument you would not need to use the emotional tactic of claiming that people who are pro-choice and believe that it is the mothers decision and only her to decide if she want to terminate a fetus into claiming that they are pro-abortion and would make that choice easily or even to force others to abort a wanted pregnancy, which has never been the case.
I thought he had a point though. At least currently, would-be fathers don't have a legal standing to decide whether not a pregnancy will be aborted anyway. So whether women refuse pro-lifer guys or not wouldn't seem to have any effect, would it? I guess unless it compels them to finally see the errors of their ways and change their minds?
 
Nobody is saying that you or your church must like it because that approval is irrelevant. You aren't being asked and it isn't wanted. Nowhere in the law does it say that this law is only enforced or legal if a certain religion group gives its stamp of approve. How many time and how many ways does this need to be explained to you before you understand. The rights of other people, both secular and religious are not up for your endorsement or approval, just as their free speech rights are not determined by yours or those of your church. The US was not founded as a christian country and everyone else of every other religion has equal rights. We do not obey yo or your church.

iu
Not asked or wanted by you is what you mean. Maybe not by others like you. On the other hand there are plenty of people who do want that Christian influence and want to participate with others who share it. I like all Americans do have a voice and do influence what happens and what laws we make. I vote, I communicate with my representatives, I talk to others in my community.
As far as the country not being founded as Christian nation I think you are wrong. Doesn't mean everyone was a Christian but there definitely was and still remains a large Christian influence. All of your and everybody else's morality comes from some influence on you, for many that is Christianity.
Here's a short list of some opinions that differ from yours.

 
methinks no one was having sex with these women anyway lol
You see most of these women at pro-abortion protests and they all look mentally ill or demonic. I watched the videos of LAPD clearing a bunch of these people off of the harbor freeway and it’s all fake hair colors, butch cuts, bizarre clothing etc

While shouting vile things at the officers, vulgarity and uncivilized words.
 
Nobody is saying that you or your church must like it because that approval is irrelevant. You aren't being asked and it isn't wanted. Nowhere in the law does it say that this law is only enforced or legal if a certain religion group gives its stamp of approve. How many time and how many ways does this need to be explained to you before you understand. The rights of other people, both secular and religious are not up for your endorsement or approval, just as their free speech rights are not determined by yours or those of your church. The US was not founded as a christian country and everyone else of every other religion has equal rights. We do not obey yo or your church.

iu
Non Christians like to refer to Jefferson but they rarely do more than a quote or two don't ever look too deep. Jefferson wrote about the effect of Jesus Christ on himself. In fact he wrote his own bible made up of quotes from Jesus taken from the Gospels.
 
Nobody is saying that you or your church must like it because that approval is irrelevant. You aren't being asked and it isn't wanted. Nowhere in the law does it say that this law is only enforced or legal if a certain religion group gives its stamp of approve. How many time and how many ways does this need to be explained to you before you understand. The rights of other people, both secular and religious are not up for your endorsement or approval, just as their free speech rights are not determined by yours or those of your church. The US was not founded as a christian country and everyone else of every other religion has equal rights. We do not obey yo or your church.

iu
Lol

The cope here is just amazing.

I want a wall of seperation between your atheism and state
 
Non Christians like to refer to Jefferson but they rarely do more than a quote or two don't ever look too deep. Jefferson wrote about the effect of Jesus Christ on himself. In fact he wrote his own bible made up of quotes from Jesus taken from the Gospels.
Jefferson was not a orthodox or triune christian. He hated the establishment church and thought the idea of a revealed Jesus as the son of god was an absurd myth. He rewrote the bible to reflect his views of Jesus as a mortal man as a teacher instead of Jesus as the son of god and edited out such absurd ideas as the virgin birth, resurrection and miracles. Jefferson was a deist but he was accused of being an atheist during his bid to become POTUS. John Adams felt likewise.

The sources that you used at laughably biased. The fact that Jefferson wrote the famous letter to the Danbury baptists that describes the wall of separation between church and state is ignored by you. Jefferson and Madison were both adamant that the US was not a Christian country or founded on christian ideas.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State.
Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all of his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.





“And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away all this artificial scaffolding...​

{Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823}”​


Notes from the state of Virginia, By Jefferson. 1787

"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth. ... Our sister states of Pennsylvania and New York, however, have long subsisted without any establishment at all. The experiment was new and doubtful when they made it. It has answered beyond conception. They flourish infinitely. Religion is well supported; of various kinds, indeed, but all good enough; all sufficient to preserve peace and order: or if a sect arises, whose tenets would subvert morals, good sense has fair play, and reasons and laughs it out of doors, without suffering the state to be troubled with it. They do not hang more malefactors than we do. They are not more disturbed with religious dissensions. On the contrary, their harmony is unparalleled, and can be ascribed to nothing but their unbounded tolerance, because there is no other circumstance in which they differ from every nation on earth. They have made the happy discovery, that the way to silence religious disputes, is to take no notice of them. Let us too give this experiment fair play, and get rid, while we may, of those tyrannical laws
 
Last edited:

Abstinence was trending on Twitter on Saturday in the wake the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

A number of pro-choice Americans on social media were also pushing for a nationwide sex strike after the high court struck down the landmark abortion ruling.

“Women of America: Take the pledge. Because SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade, we cannot take the risk of an unintended pregnancy, therefore, we will not have sex with any man — including our husbands — unless we are trying to become pregnant,” one Twitter user wrote.
=============================================================
From the sound of this the hubbys are the ones left in the lurch. Ladies: there are a number of ways to sexually satisfy your partner without risking pregnancy. You might have to catch some porn to gather some pointers. Hubby will thank you for doing your homework.
Okay, so essentially this does prove that personal responsibility is a component of sex, and that "abstinence" does work apparently. Quite a 180 if you ask me, but at least the pretenses are no longer on the table.

Not to mention how sexually clueless these individuals must be if they think that intercourse is the only way to mutually achieve orgasm.
 
Jefferson was not a orthodox or triune christian. He hated the establishment church and thought the idea of a revealed Jesus as the son of god was an absurd myth. He rewrote the bible to reflect his views of Jesus as a mortal man as a teacher instead of Jesus as the son of god and edited out such absurd ideas as the virgin birth, resurrection and miracles. Jefferson was a deist but he was accused of being an atheist during his bid to become POTUS. John Adams felt likewise.

The sources that you used at laughably biased. The fact that Jefferson wrote the famous letter to the Danbury baptists that describes the wall of separation between church and state is ignored by you. Jefferson and Madison were both adamant that the US was not a Christian country or founded on christian ideas.
Jefferson's not nor wasn't a federal Judge, so his written opinion doesn't matter as to the goings on of things, honestly.

If it "wasn't a Christian country", it can certainly be made into one since everything in the Constitution is changeable towards that end. Just as the notion of "separation of church and state" is a flawed false dichotomy to begin with that honestly needs to just be relegated to this history books.

Likewise, Jefferson's opinion on things such as "the virgin birth" weren't based on any thing substantial, but rather just simple folk wisdom and common sense. His predictions obviously haven't proven themselves to be particularly accurate. Deism is actually full of holes and based on somewhat nonsensical premises which, unlike true theism, are rather debunkable and archaic.
 
You seem strangely emotionally invested in this.

As for this new abstinence kick, LMAO, have people forgotten about condoms, spermicide, and contraceptive pills?

It seems that what these pro-abortion losers really want is sex with absolutely no risk, but that's not reality, it's not how life works.

Seems to me they have two choices, become celibate losers, or grow up and become adults who accept the risks and rewards of sex.

Holy projection, Batman.
 

Abstinence was trending on Twitter on Saturday in the wake the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

A number of pro-choice Americans on social media were also pushing for a nationwide sex strike after the high court struck down the landmark abortion ruling.

“Women of America: Take the pledge. Because SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade, we cannot take the risk of an unintended pregnancy, therefore, we will not have sex with any man — including our husbands — unless we are trying to become pregnant,” one Twitter user wrote.
=============================================================
From the sound of this the hubbys are the ones left in the lurch. Ladies: there are a number of ways to sexually satisfy your partner without risking pregnancy. You might have to catch some porn to gather some pointers. Hubby will thank you for doing your homework.
These people are idiots, first abortion isn't banned you can still have one if you need to. If you're going to freeze out your husband you have to be the only woman on the planet because they can go find someone else to bang.

And it's funny that the solution conservatives offer for avoiding needing an abortion is don't have sex and these people are simply obliging.

Seems like this is poorly conceived.
 
Unless their boyfriends/husbands are anti-abortion jackasses. In that case, they can satisfy themselves with their fleshlights.
Or with the other 2 billion women in the world. If consider striking against me because of some law change is put you right out on the curb. This is why you don't get married.
 
So, while the pro choice women plan on withholding sex, the pro life women will intentionally breed just to balance things out…
Nah, THe pro life woman who accidently get pregnant will cross state lines and have secret abortions. Because it's different for them.
 
lol lotta angry incels
 
As I said you really don't know much about all this do you. What you do is important to Christians because we may not like what you do, may not believe your choices are moral, ethical, or correct, and that they are bad for people both you and others who they effect. We are taught to love people, not what they do but the people but we are not taught to love those who commit sin and turn from Christ knowingly. We are taught to pray for them and pray they will turn to Christ. It is a concern of Christians.
I didn't say you were obligated to do anything, that's called freedom of choice and free will which God has given everyone. You will be judged for what you do and how you act on earth because that's what people do, but ultimately God will judge you and if you have never accepted Christ then you will pay for that choice.
Now if you don't believe in God, Christ as the savior, sin and repentance and salvation then you will not care. Ok, so if you are correct you can have a good ole time committing all the atrocities you like, killing babies being among the worst, all the sinful acts you want, you know the ones Christians disagree with. But if Christians are right, you will spend eternity in hell.
lol Christians are the ones trying to arrest people for this "freedom of choice."
 
Back
Top Bottom